The older worker: gender and age discrimination in the workplace

Francioli, Stéphane; North, Michael S.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-816094-7.00013-1

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 145 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such literatures explicitly point to precarity and risk that accrues to older individuals later in life (see Crystal, Shea, and Reyes 2017;Grenier et al 2017;Standing 2012)-precarity and risk that are empirically observed in workplace audit and experimental research. This research points to persistent ageist stereotypes among employers (e.g., Duncan and Loretto 2004;Granleese and Sayer 2006;Harris et al 2018;Loscocco and Kalleberg 1988;Mueller, Wallace, and Price 1992;Palmore, Branch, and Harris 2005) as well as specific vulnerabilities when it comes to career stagnation and disinvestment (Francioli and North 2021;Lain and Loretto 2016;Lassus, Lopez, and Roscigno 2015;North and Fiske 2015;Roscigno et al 2007). Moreover, labor process research provides insights into status dynamics and social relations that can bolster or mitigate inequality and vulnerability (Egdell et al 2020;Roscigno, Sauer, and Valet 2018;Tausig 1999).…”

Section: (Us Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [Eeoc] 2018)mentioning

confidence: 82%

Workplace Age Discrimination and Social-psychological Well-being

Roscigno

Zheng

Crowley

2022

Society and Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The research literature on workplace inequality has given comparatively little attention to age discrimination and its social-psychological consequences. In this article, we highlight useful insights from critical gerontological, labor process, and mental health literatures and analyze the patterning of workplace age discrimination and its implications for sense of job insecurity, job-specific stress, and the overall mental health of full-time workers 40 years old and above, covered by the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA). Our analyses, which draw on two decades and five waves of the General Social Survey (2002–2018), reveal (1) the prevalence of self-reported workplace age discrimination and growing vulnerability particularly for those 60 years and above, (2) clear social-psychological costs when it comes to job insecurity, work-specific stress, and overall self-reported mental health, and (3) dimensions of status and workplace social relations that offer a protective buffer or exacerbate age discrimination’s corrosive effects. Future research on age as an important status vulnerability within the domain of employment and the implications of unjust treatment for well-being and mental health are clearly warranted.

show abstract

Section: (Us Equal Employment Opportunity Commission [Eeoc] 2018)mentioning

confidence: 82%

Workplace Age Discrimination and Social-psychological Well-being

Roscigno

Zheng

Crowley

2022

Society and Mental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, seeing older individuals as an economic threat may facilitate the justification of ageism. In business life, for instance, older workers are often subjected to discrimination in recruitment processes (Francioli & North, 2021) and forced into retirement (Powell, 2010). The difficulties arising from the COVID‐19 pandemic, especially the scarcity of resources in health care, may have prompted people toward social Darwinist and ageist attitudes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Let the strongest survive”: Ageism and social Darwinism as barriers to supporting policies to benefit older individuals

Kanık

Uluğ

Solak

et al. 2022

Journal of Social Issues

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The World Health Organization (WHO) identified +65 individuals as one of the most vulnerable populations in the current pandemic. Previous research has shown a robust association between ageism and derogatory attitudes and behaviors targeting older people. We proposed that reluctance of people under age 65 to endorse the policies that benefit older adults can be further explained by their adherence to social Darwinism. We tested a mediation model to examine whether social Darwinism would predict support for policies directly and indirectly through the endorsement of ageist attitudes. We conducted two correlational studies in Turkey (Study 1; N = 1261) and the United States (Study 2; N = 210). In Study 1, we collected data through social media and messaging platforms in April 2020. In Study 2, participants were recruited via Prolific Academic in May 2020. In both studies, we found that adherence to social Darwinist beliefs negatively predicted support for policies. We also found that this association was positively mediated by ageist attitudes. Overall, our research contributes to the scholarly effort to identify the social‐psychological barriers to public support for legal initiatives aimed to secure a healthy and productive future for older people.

show abstract

The Dynamic-Grit Mindset: Flourishing in the Future Workforce

Fadhil

2023

New Research and Possibilities in Wellbeing Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The older worker: gender and age discrimination in the workplace

Cited by 8 publications

References 145 publications

Workplace Age Discrimination and Social-psychological Well-being

Workplace Age Discrimination and Social-psychological Well-being

“Let the strongest survive”: Ageism and social Darwinism as barriers to supporting policies to benefit older individuals

The Dynamic-Grit Mindset: Flourishing in the Future Workforce

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About